Faculty at the University of Colorado Denver publicly announced concerns about the institution’s chancellor, Ken Christensen, dating a professor who oversees a department focused on career advancement.
Christensen disclosed his relationship with school psychology professor to the university through the proper channels in late 2025, according to CU’s vice president of communications, Michele Ames.
Ames said the chancellor and faculty member are consenting adults who followed the rules in reporting their relationship.
“Almost immediately following, a mitigation plan was put in place,” Ames told The Denver Post. “Per the policy, it requires the two individuals be walled off in terms of the way they interact at the university.”
The mitigation plan is considered part of Christensen’s personnel files and is confidential, Ames said.
The confidentiality is one grievance raised in a series of communications provided to the Post from late April through this week between and .
The Faculty Assembly Executive Committee — made up of a dozen educators across the university — issued a letter to CU President Saliman on April 17 expressing faculty concerns about potential conflicts of interest arising from the chancellor dating a tenured faculty member who also serves as the director of the. The CFDA provides resources and guidance for faculty seeking career advancement, such as tenure or grant opportunities.
“A relationship between the most powerful administrator on campus and a faculty member embedded in processes that shape faculty careers raises serious questions about the Chancellor’s ability to fulfill his obligations to the university community with the required objectivity,” the letter said.
Christensen was . He previously served as provost, senior vice president for academic affairs, and chief academic officer at Illinois Institute of Technology. Christensen holds a bachelor of science in mechanical engineering from the University of New Mexico, a master of science in mechanical engineering from the California Institute of Technology and a doctorate in theoretical and applied mechanics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
In an April 24 response, President Saliman thanked the committee for their “respectful letter” which raised concerns “in good faith.”
Saliman assured the committee the confidential mitigation plan “ensures that the Chancellor is walled off from any Center for Faculty Development and Advancement or partner related decisions,” the letter read.
The faculty committee wrote back Tuesday, saying they are grateful Saliman confirmed the existence of a mitigation plan but that it was not helpful in assuaging real or perceived conflicts of interest if it was secret.
on “conflicts of interest in cases of amorous relationships” establishes that an amorous relationship between two people becomes a conflict of interest when one person has direct evaluative authority over the other. The policy requires the direct evaluative authority be eliminated.
The policy is in the process of being updated.
The updates would broaden evaluative authority to include indirect supervisory relationships and cover both real and perceived conflicts of interest, according to the letters exchanged between the faculty council and president.
In their letter, the faculty committee said not only would potential conflicts of interest arise in the impartiality of future tenure decisions and other professional development opportunities, but in the development and approval of the pending revision of the amorous relationship policy.
The faculty requested the chancellor recuse himself from involvement with that policy update.
Saliman wrote back that, absent an actual conflict, the amorous relationship policy “has never been applied in a way that requires the Chancellor or any academic supervisor subject to a mitigation plan to broadly recuse themselves from reviewing proposed policy changes or reviewing all tenure applications.”
On Tuesday, CU Denver professor Wendy Bolyard — chair of CU Denver’s Faculty Assembly Executive Committee — made a public statement about the relationship at a faculty council meeting.
“Executive Committee made the difficult decision to disclose this conflict of interest because we cannot protect ourselves from a conflict we do not know exists,” Bolyard said during the meeting. “It is our obligation, and our privilege, to be the voice of this faculty — and that means ensuring we have the information we need to make informed decisions about our professional lives and our interactions with university offices and leadership.”
When reached for comment, Bolyard said she could not speak on this matter.
“As a teaching professor, I do not have the privilege of tenure,” Bolyard said. “Raising difficult issues is quite challenging in my role, knowing I am an at-will employee.”
Faculty members concerned about how a conflict of interest has or could impact them are asked to report to the CU system office’s president of human resources, Tony Gherardini.
